Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Below is my proposed letter of claim to Yodel. I would welcome comment.   Dear Yodel, Claimant x: claim for breach of contract loss of package xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx I am making a claim against you claim against for breach of contract relating to your loss of a package valued at £150.00. I refer to two webchats that I have had with your organisation following which I was advised that Yodel were not prepared to recompense me for my loss. This letter is being sent to in accordance with the Practice Direction on Pre-action Conduct and Protocols (the Pre-action PD) contained in the Civil Procedure Rules (CPR). In particular, I refer you to paragraphs 13 to 16 of the Pre-action PD concerning the court's powers to impose sanctions for failing to comply with its provisions. Ignoring this letter may lead to our my commencing proceedings against you and may increase your liability for costs. Circumstances leading to my claim against Yodel On 14 June 2024, I made a sale on eBay of a set of 3 Kirkland Signature golf wedges (‘the goods’) at a price of £150.00 plus £6.00 postage. I received payment from the purchaser via eBay and on 15 June I purchased postage from eBay’s Packlink. Packlink arranged the delivery of the package to the purchaser with Yodel. Having packaged the goods in wrapping paper, I delivered them on 15 June to the Shell petrol station on ……..and a tracking number of  xxx was given. Tracking showed that the package made it to your Leeds Depot on 15 June but thereafter the package went missing. The Purchaser had been advised that they were ready for collection at her local depot in Preston but they could not be located in Preston. I personally attended your Leeds depot where your helpful staff confirmed that the package had been scanned into that depot and was also scanned going onto one of your trailers (7DL 1436) bound for Preston but that thereafter the package was not scanned again and could not be located either in Leeds or Preston. Due to non-receipt of the goods, I was required to refund the buyer her £156.00. I have sought compensation via Packlink but they are only prepared to pay ‘basic compensation’ of £25.00. Through your webchat I have sought to make a claim against Yodel but have simply been referred back to Packlink suggesting that I do not have any rights against Yodel. You are referred to the The Contract (Rights of Third Parties Act) 1999 upon which I rely and which give me the right to sue on the contract just as if I was a directly contracting partner. I was a discernible beneficiary of the contract entered into by you with Packlink to deliver the package on my behalf. As the sender of the parcel I was somebody who was intended to benefit under the parcel delivery contract. In breach of contract, you failed to exercise reasonable care and skill to deliver the package to the purchaser but instead have lost the package. Given the scanning history of the package, it is likely to have been misappropriated whilst in your custody – a failure to take reasonable care to avoid such misappropriation.   My Claim against Yodel I wish to claim the sum of £150.00 being the value of the goods lost by Yodel   Relevant documents I enclose copies of the following documents that are relevant to this matter: 1.    A screenshot of the eBay sale of the goods and the tracking notes.   Alternative dispute resolution I am prepared to consider ADR.   I  look forward to receiving confirmation that accept liability for these matters, together with a full settlement of my claim, within [21] days of the date of this letter, namely by [DATE].] [In the absence of a full response by that date, I will issue and serve proceedings without further notice. Yours faithfully,    
    • I didn't know I had to go to the US. Were you there recently, TOR? I'm not sure you've been to London recently either. We know some 'average Americans' and I've asked what they think about things today, as it happens.
    • The scammers were posing as young women online to trick people into sending sexually explicit material.View the full article
    • To even ask that question you clearly haven’t visited anywhere in the USA recently The cesspit that is SanFrancisco Venice beach that no one in their right mind would visit  The open drug taking, crime, zombies everywhere (reminds me of Khans London) The Texan border towns flooded with illegals (The sole responsibility of Harris) And that’s before we get onto world matters  One sniff of Harris in the White House  and China will be into Taiwan Endless tax dollars being thrown at Zelenskyy for what reason? To keep killing Ukrainians? The average American hates it  The barmy Biden/Harris rush to net zero  Perhaps as President Trump can knock that lunacy on the head worldwide 
    • Their fees can go up with different stages of enforcement. They will almost certainly have charged the creditor the first stage (compliance) of £90 including VAT. This will be added to your bill though. Then they are allowed to visit with a view to entering into an agreement with you. They may charge £190 plus VAT for this plus 7.5% of anything over the first £1000. A second visit would trigger an additional fee of £495 plus VAT. Finally, they can visit with a view to removing goods for sale. They can charge £525 plus VAT for this visit plus 7.5% of anything over the first £1000. Not sure if these figures match with anything you have. You would need to ask which fees have been added. You shouldn’t have to pay the VAT. Hopefully, it isn’t a major issue given you won’t be dealing with the bailiffs.
  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
        • Like
      • 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
        • Like
      • 162 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

Littlewoods Nightmare-Help Needed Please!


TAO
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5479 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

Where do I begin..I'm having a nightmare with Littlewoods and would be very grateful for any advice on this as really don't know what to do next:(

I requested a copy of my agreement back in February this year and Littlewoods proceeded to send me something which looks very dubious. It has a completed application form dated 10/10/98 when the account was opened. However it does not have a copy of the credit agreement matching it. Instead they have printed out what looks like a more recent credit agreement (unsigned) which has the date 24/09/2008 at the bottom...clearly the two do not correspond.

 

My second point of confusion is having received this conflicting information I asked them for a full breakdown on the account, clearly showing all goods purchased during the period they are claiming for.

What they have sent seems to be just an account overview and not giving all the information I have requested.

 

I have now received a letter from Moorcroft dated 4/5/09 stating that unless full payment is received by 11/05/09 then they will send out their home collections department and instruct solicitors to commence legal proceedings.

They interestingly also make reference in this letter to ' despite our letters to you, you have defaulted on the agreement reached'......I have never made an agreement with Moorcroft. I spoke to them back in March and advised them that I would not be paying and again requested the documentation.

 

Any advice where I go from here please?

img002.jpg

img003.jpg

img001.jpg

Edited by TAO
Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't worry about moorcroft, they are full of hot air and empty threats. Send moorcroft the 'bemused' letter below. In the unlikely event that someone turns up, tell them to go away or you will ring the police.

ACCOUNT IN DISPUTE

Dear Sir or Madam,

Account number: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

I must admit that I am rather bemused as to why this account has been passed to yourselves, as it is in dispute with the **original creditor/DCA** and has been since DATE 2007. 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

My last letter from **original creditor/DCA** was DATE and intimated that my complaint would be resolved on **DATE**, this obviously hasn’t happened. As **original creditor/DCA** are now in default of my Consumer Credit Act request, OFT Collection Guidelines, *Subject Access request and have also breached *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 the **original creditor/DCA** for resolution of these defaults and breaches, as **New DCA** cannot lawfully pursue any enforcement activities.

If **New 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.

After taking advice, I am of the opinion that any continued pursuit is in violation of the Administration of Justice Act 1970 section 40 as well as breaching a number of the OFT Collection Guidelines

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

I would appreciate your due diligence in this matter. I look forward to hearing from you in writing.

Yours faithfully

 

As for littlewoods. The 'agreement' they sent from the nineties does not contain the prescibed terms. So send them the below letter..

Account In Dispute

 

Ref:

 

Dear Sir/Madam

 

On xx/xx/2009 I made a formal lawful request for a true signed agreement for the alleged account under consumer credit Act 1974 s77/8. A copy of which is enclosed for your perusal and ease of reference.

You have failed to comply with my request, and as such the account entered default on xx/xx/2009.

 

The document that you are obliged to send me is a true copy of the executed agreement that contained all of the prescribed terms, all other required terms and statutory notices and was signed by both your company and myself as defined in section 61(1) of CCA 74 and subsequent Statutory Instruments. If the executed agreement contained any reference to any other document, you are also obliged to send me a copy of that document.

 

Furthermore

 

 

You are aware that the Consumer Credit Act allows 12 working days for a request for a true copy of a credit agreement to be carried out before your client enters into a default situation.

 

This limit has expired.

 

As you are no doubt aware section 78(6) states:

 

If the creditor fails to comply with Subsection (1)

 

(a) He is not entitled , while the default continues, to enforce the agreement.

 

Therefore this account has become unenforceable at law.

 

As you have Failed to comply with a lawful request for a true, signed copy of the said agreement and other relevant documents mentioned in it, Failed to send a full statement of the account and Failed to provide any of the documentation requested.

 

Consequentially any legal action you pursue will be averred as both UNLAWFUL and VEXATIOUS.

 

Furthermore I shall counterclaim that any such action constitutes unlawful harassment.

 

Please note you may also consider this letter as a statutory notice under section 10 of the Data Protection Act to cease processing any data in relation to this account with immediate effect.

 

This means you must remove all information regarding this account from your own internal records and from my records with any credit reference agencies.

 

Should you refuse to comply, you must within 21 days provide me with a detailed breakdown of your reasoning behind continuing to process my data.

 

It is not sufficient to simply state that you have a ‘legal right’; You must outline your reasoning in this matter and state upon which legislation this reasoning depends.

 

Should you not respond within 14 days I expect that this means you agree to remove all such data.

 

Furthermore you should be aware that a creditor is not permitted to take ANY

Action against an account whilst it remains in dispute.

 

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.

 

 

I reserve the right to report your actions to any such regulatory authorities as I see fit.

You have 14 days from receiving this letter to contact me with your intentions to resolve this matter which is now a formal complaint.

 

I would appreciate your due diligence in this matter.

 

I look forward to hearing from you in writing.

 

Yours faithfully

NAME (print / do not sign)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Hello again Nagasis

 

Just thought I would post an update whilst on here on the above - sent both letters as suggested on 25th May 2009 - to date have had no response to either....

Is there anything else I should be doing at this stage?

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here we go again guys....after hearing nothing from Moorcroft or Littlewoods after requesting a full statement and sending the above letters....I have today received a letter from Frederickson International Limited...saying they are instructed by Phoenix recoveries to collect the debt.

 

Does this mean Moorcroft have sold on to another DCA or returned to Littlewoods??

 

Also I am concerned as what Littlewoods have sent me as the 'CCA' is clearly not the original...I've just had another look at it and there is a date at the bottom of the terms page of 24/9/08..clearly they do not have an original and have just printed out this later copy of terms and attached to the application form! Surely this is underhanded and wouldn't stand up in court?

 

Do I now have to send the same again to Frederickson advising or given that I have already sent the above letters is that enough? Advice on this would be greatly appreciated please...thanks so much.

TAO

Edited by TAO
Link to post
Share on other sites

Here we go again guys....after hearing nothing from Moorcroft or Littlewoods after requesting a full statement and sending the above letters....I have today received a letter from Frederickson International Limited...saying they are instructed by Phoenix recoveries to collect the debt.

 

Does this mean Moorcroft have sold on to another DCA or returned to Littlewoods??

 

Also I am concerned as what Littlewoods have sent me as the 'CCA' is clearly not the original...I've just had another look at it and there is a date at the bottom of the terms page of 24/9/08..clearly they do not have an original and have just printed out this later copy of terms and attached to the application form! Surely this is underhanded and wouldn't stand up in court?

 

Do I now have to send the same again to Frederickson advising or given that I have already sent the above letters is that enough? Advice on this would be greatly appreciated please...thanks so much.

TAO

 

Welcome to the fun game DCA-Merry-Go-Round, yep, it looks like what they have sent you is unenforceable in court (if they are ever brave/dim enough to go that far).

 

You can either just send the letters again to Frederickson or just ignore them, you'll find that some people here like to 'toy' with these type of companies just to annoy them and ensure they waste money trying to collect debts. Its all upto you.

 

Andy

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Andy

 

Thanks for that advice, much appreciated. I will send the letters again to Fredericksons as I think they need to be aware they are battling over an unenforceable debt. Hopefully they will realise it is a pointless exercise and return it back to Littlewoods. I'll keep you posted of developments:)

 

Thanks

TAO

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...