Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • 12mph (beyond any UK limit) will certainly qualify for a Fixed Penalty. So you should received an offer of a FP for each of the remaining two offences. Be sure to submit your licence details as instructed when you accept the offer. If you don't your £100 will be returned to you and the police will prosecute you in court.
    • and it will be also now written off under age related criteria anyway.
    • @dx100ukThanks for this! I'm still not clear if I'm facing more than 6 points on my license though. Can you explain any further please? When I accept the 2nd speeding ticket, will they just charge me £100 and 3 points, or will they be more severe consequences since that offense took place the following day of the 1st offense? Similarly, when I accept the 3rd offense, will they look at my record or just charge me with the £100 fine and 3 points? @Man in the middleI've been searching the forum and you seem very knowledgeable. Would you mind giving a look at my query please? Thanks in advance!!
    • Yes of course. That's why it says cc:: BIg Motoring World at the bottom. Don't imagine that this solves the issue. It doesn't. He not have to force the finance company and big motoring world to accept the rejection to give your money back. I suggest that you get the letter off tomorrow. And let us know what you hear but on Friday you should then send a threat to the finance company.   Have a look what I have said here about your options and read the whole thread as well.  
    • Been perusing the actual figures on the polls above wondering where the '16% claimed for deform comes from? I understand that there are 'weighted' end results based on secret calculations ...   Probably going to repeat this later, but remember that the ukip/brexit/reform/deform party has ALWAYS had poll speculation FAR better than their actual  performance at elections - by large margins. SO: The labor and Tory votes come largely from simply the people who say they will vote for them - sorted Lab 43% Tory 20%, with maybe another small 1-2% coming from the weightings of the 'not sures' Greens largely get what is declared from 'other' , although with another declared green bit from the 'pressed' question   So as the share of the voting displayed in 'other' granted to reform/deform is around 11%, where does the '16% too often being reported come from? Seems that reform has been granted as beneficiary of effectively ALL the don't knows and wont says, who when pressed didn't actually declare for someone else ... effectively adding 40%+ to their reported polling % - rather strange given their consistent under-performance compared to polling - or perhaps that is the cause of the higher rating eh?   Now I admit the possibility (probability?) of wingers being ashamed of declaring their support for the yuckey lemon end of the spectrum ... but surely  that should affect the 'Torys as well? Maybe the statisticians have simply weighted in that deform wingers are simply more likely to lie?   But - without 'weightings' and assumptions that faragits will get everything that isnt declared as a definite and unequivocal 'not that Piers Morgan' - reform is on around 11% it seems.   Add to that the history of polling a lot less than the hype - and the simple fact that faragit wingers seem to be spread across the country (presumably skulking in their moms spare room despite being 45+) and greens and lib dems seem to be community minded - I think two seats will be an epic result for farage. Hardly the opposition - far more raving wingnut party.   and importantly - Has farage got a home in clacton yet?
  • 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

Egg and Home Collection Services


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5355 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

A little bit of back ground -

 

In late Nov last year we sent CCA request to Egg as hubbies Egg card had been passed to Moorcroft. Time lapsed for that request on 4th Dec so we sent letter, stating ' I do not acknowledge any debt to your company'

Recieved a letter back from Moorcroft on 9th Dec stating that they had sent request to Moorcroft and would forward agreement as soon as they had it.

On 2nd Feb we recievd a letter and a copy of an agreement via Moorcroft - we were going to post letter and agrement here but when we saw eact agreement in other posts we didnt bother took same action as advised to others stating that they had failed to comply with CCA 1974 by providing a valid agreement - all was quiet.....

 

Got a letter today from Home Collection Services Ltd - strangely enough based in STockport as well contents of letter as follows

 

 

Dear Mr

 

Egg Banking PLC

 

Balance £****.**

 

You could be free of this debt if you telephone us and agree one of the folowing options:

 

OPTION 1 - Interest Free Repayment Plan

 

Telephone us for a monthly repayment plan. If we agree an offer and you pay montly installments we wil: -

Freeze any further interest

Stop any administration fees being added

Not take legal action

 

Option " - A Substantial Discount

 

Telephone us for a full and final settlement figure. Te benefit to you will be

A minimum discount available to you reducing the debt by a substantial amount.

A full and final payment will sto you from having to pay any further costs

Once the agreed payment has been received and cleared we will not contact you again concerning this debt.

 

Moorcroft Debt Recovery has informed us that you have ignored their letters. Please do not ignore this letter. Contact us today and allow us to help you be free of this debt.

 

 

Is it just me or do Moorcroft agree with the contents of the last letter and have just got rid of this debt to someone else, or is it Moorcroft sending this letter in a different guise??

 

I guess we are to write to them and state that the acount is in disptue we have not ignored Moorcrofts correspondance - we wrote to them on Blah and blah and they have signed for the letters

 

Wot do I suggest they do then... I suppose I can only put a polite statement but not sure how to phrase it.

 

Any one else had similar eperience

 

thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

Send them this;

 

ACCOUNT IN DISPUTE

 

Your Reference:

Client reference:

 

 

Dear Sir or Madam,

 

I must admit that I am rather bemused as to why this account has been passed to you, as it is in dispute with ***DCA*** and has been since ***Date***

Not only is this a breach of OFT collection guidelines, but also in breach of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 and Data Protection Act 1998

 

 

As ***DCA*** is now in default of my Consumer Credit Act request, Office of Fair Trading Collection Guidelines and s10 Data Protection Act request, I consider this account to be in SERIOUS DISPUTE.

 

As you are aware while my Consumer Credit Act request remains in default, enforcement action is NOT permitted; under s127 this constitutes a complete defence at law. Consequentially any legal action you pursue will be averred as both UNLAWFUL and VEXATIOUS.

 

Now I would respectfully suggest that this account is returned to ***DCA*** for resolution of these defaults and breaches, as ***DCA*** cannot lawfully pursue any enforcement activities.

 

If ***DCA***chooses to ignore my dispute and attempt enforcement, I will initiate legal action and file reports with the appropriate authorities, including, but not limited to, Trading Standards, Office of Fair Trading, Information Commissioners Office, Financial Ombudsman Service and possible court action.

 

I hope that this will not be necessary and an acceptable solution can be accomplished.

 

I would appreciate your due diligence in this matter.

 

Yours faithfully Print name do not sign

Link to post
Share on other sites

Home Collection Services are part of Moorcroft and according to the OFT website their consumer credit licence lapsed in 2004. Before I sent them any other correspondence, I would be asking for their CCL details and check with the OFT that they have a licence. By the way, Moorcroft's licence has also expired and there is nothing on the OFT website about it being renewed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You can change the first paragraph to; ;)

 

Even though your consumer credit licence lapsed in 2004, I must admit that I am rather bemused as to why this account has been passed to you, as it is in dispute with ***DCA*** and has been since ***Date***

Not only is this a breach of OFT collection guidelines, but also in breach of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 and Data Protection Act 1998

Link to post
Share on other sites

Please ensure that you report unlicenced trading to the OFT (you can email them).

 

I favour a robust approach:

 

I refer to your begging letter of (date).

 

According to the Office of Fair Trading database that your consumer credit licence lapsed in 2004. Trading as a debt collection agency without a consumer credit licence is a criminal offence.

 

In the circumstances, until you provide me with substantive evidence that you are properly licenced, I am unable to enter into further correspondence.

 

Yours etc.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Got a response from Morrocroft today regarding recent correspondance - funny I thought I had written to Home collection services!!:-|

 

It goes

 

I acknowledge reciept of your recent correspondance with regards to the above account. I am the complaince Officer of this company and it is part of my role to deal with concerns of this kind.

 

I have now been able to fully investigate this matter and I can confirm that there does appear to be a conflict of opinion here between your perception of the acountin question and the views expressed by our client. Whereas I would ask you to accept my assurance that we have been acting in good faith on the instructions of our client, it is clear that there is an impasse here with regard to the account. I believe therefore that the most sensible course of action would be for the company to return the acount to our client and to cease any further activity with regard to it.

 

Does this mean that we wil start the whole proces again in a few weeks with a another DCA??

Anyone else had a similar response from Moorcroft re EGG

Link to post
Share on other sites

Whilst the account is in dispute they may not do the following;

 

The lack of a credit agreement is a very clear dispute and as such the following applies.

You may not demand any payment on the account, nor am I obliged to offer any payment to you.

You may not add further interest or any charges to the account.

You may not pass the account to a third party.

You may not register any information in respect of the account with any credit reference agency.

You may not issue a default notice related to the account.

 

If they do you can make a complaint to TS, OFT and the Information Commissioner.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Got a letter today from ARC (Europe) Ltd Credit Management, regarding Egg card

 

It reads

 

This account has been passed to us as for collection as our above named client has been unable to obtain payment of the outstanding amount from you.

 

We wish to make it quite clear that unless a substantial payment is made to us witin the next ten days, along with a firm offer to clear the rest of the overdue balance, we will pass your account to our solicitors, with instructions to issue proceedings against you in the county court.

 

Please ensure all apyments are made to ARC (Europe) Ltd. Failure to do this will delay it being credited to your account. Alternatively you may call the number above to make a payment by debit card or credit card

 

Yours blah blahh

 

I take it now I now send a letter to these guys along the lines of this account is in dispute.... do I enclose a copy of the letter sent by Moorcroft as above??

 

thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 6 months later...

HI All

 

Havent posted for a while, but just spent the mroning reviewing everthing for this.

 

On 6th April had a letter from another DCA ARC Collection services, stating that all information requested by OH had been sent, so pay up basically...

 

21st April recieved a leter from Trevor Munn solicitors sent a letter before action

 

OH responded stating that account was in dispute etc with copies of correspondnace previously sent and recieved

 

5th May OH received a letter stating court papers had been prepared and were ready to be filed but he could still sto this by paying.

 

OH did not send a repsonse to this letter

 

15th June 09 letter from ARC Collection services again stating that they had conducted a Land Regsitry search and they were now aware that he owned house and the next step for them would be to instruct Trevour Munn to issue court proceedings and get a charging order on property. Although again OH could still stop this by offering to pay a mutually agreeeable, substantially discounted one off payment in the net 14 days....

 

OH has heard absolutely nothing since, is there anything we can do to try and get this brought to a close ......

 

Any advice gratefully received

 

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

Your Street

Town

City

Postcode

 

 

DATE HERE

Company Name

Road

Town

City / County

Postcode

 

Re: Harassment:

 

ACCOUNT NUMBER: XXXXXXX

 

Dear Sir/Madam

 

I write to you to demand that all communications with myself stops with immediate effect.

This includes letters & phone calls.

Your continued harassment of me puts you in breach of the Protection from Harassment Act 1997.

If you continue to harass me, i will report you to the OFT & trading Standards meaning that you will be liable to a substantial fine.

If neccessary i will seek police advice, compensation & obtain an injunction.

I trust i make my position clear.

 

Yours faithfully,

 

PRINT NAME DO NOT SIGN

Link to post
Share on other sites

Trevor Munn is ARCs rentasolicitor. Two years ago he was threatening me until I wrote to his registered office and discovered that ARC were just using his notepaper for their scarey letters

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...